I highly doubt they would do that. The advertized Trainer is free, while to access the CH Trainers you need a membership. If they were to advertize CH Trainers, so gaining potential new members for this site, who then had to purchase the membership, they would want money for it. Just like with ads on TV etc. Not saying buying the membership is a bad thing, they just won't help people making money without charging for it. Nobody really would.

I meant trainers and mods in general, but speaking of that, doesn't it already appear as though Steam is getting a Spiff from CH?

I don't know if there's any arrangement such as reduced pricing, trade-in privileges or any other similar setup that benefits CH, but shouldn't there be? CH is on record as (primarily) supporting the Steam versions of games with their trainers.

What do most CH members have, something like 200-400 titles, mostly from Steam, or at least the Lion's share? I have almost 300 from Steam, so I'm guessing I'm around average. And PW has stated CH has over 2 Million registered members. That's a pretty fair chunk for Steam, whether they've asked for it or not, using even marginal math.

It seems that Steam gets more benefit from CH than CH gets from Steam. Would that be a value that, say, GOG.com would like to make an offer for? Or would Steam be interested in some return consideration to retain the position of primary vendor for CH and CH member games?

I dunno, how about some News coverage once in awhile. It doesn't sound all that unreasonable considering the current setup which seems to heavily favor Steam. Might also be nice if the CH Lifetime Members got maybe a 10% discount for buying at Steam, too. I know, dream on.

I meant trainers and mods in general, but speaking of that, doesn't it already appear as though Steam is getting a Spiff from CH?

I don't know if there's any arrangement such as reduced pricing, trade-in privileges or any other similar setup that benefits CH, but shouldn't there be? CH is on record as (primarily) supporting the Steam versions of games with their trainers.

What do most CH members have, something like 200-400 titles, mostly from Steam, or at least the Lion's share? I have almost 300 from Steam, so I'm guessing I'm around average. And PW has stated CH has over 2 Million registered members. That's a pretty fair chunk for Steam, whether they've asked for it or not, using even marginal math.

It seems that Steam gets more benefit from CH than CH gets from Steam. Would that be a value that, say, GOG.com would like to make an offer for? Or would Steam be interested in some return consideration to retain the position of primary vendor for CH and CH member games?

I dunno, how about some News coverage once in awhile. It doesn't sound all that unreasonable considering the current setup which seems to heavily favor Steam. Might also be nice if the CH Lifetime Members got maybe a 10% discount for buying at Steam, too. I know, dream on.

Thoughts?

I think that advertising trainers on Steam would open a can of worms that we do not need open. They would be seen as going against their own anti-cheating policy. It would also give the impression of "If you truly want discounts, you need to join another club." This would further kill the openess that is the Steam platform. Ultimately, I personally prefer to have CH just percolating in the background.

I hope this all made sense....

And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music. - Friedrich Nietzsche

I thought the point had been made in earlier posts. Let me re-phrase then.

Now that we've seen Steam post a news story about Trainers, why just ****** trainers? I agree with others that said maybe Steam isn't so much against trainers and SP cheating afterall. But they still appear to be firmly against anything CH wise.

Today I see where Steam is blocking links to CH in their Steam chat, saying they may be malicious. After years of posting links in Steam chat with no problems, now they're saying they might be malicious.

So which is it Steam? Are you against trainers and mods and cheating in Single Player games based on principal? Or are you just against commercial variants and their creating sites that you're not getting a visible piece from?

Ah I wish I knew how to publish it on the news. I was just shocked seeing that was possible.

It's on Steam news because it was originally published by PCGamer. Steam is only reposting it. It's more likely if CH makes a news post that it may get posted on Steam. This makes me believe that there is no issue with using trainers in SP and not getting banned as people were so worried about. Original article - www.pcgamer.com/gta-5-trainer-allows-for-unlimited-health-and-ammo/

[Edited by imaculate, 4/21/2015 10:14:40 AM]

I never did think anyone would be banned. If you remember back to Max Payne 3, all R* did was place multiplayer cheaters in the same game sessions so they wouldn't bother non-cheaters. R* certainly didn't care about single player cheats/mods at all. I pretty much figured they'd do the same with GTA V. MP cheaters get sent to a land where everybody cheats, and single player cheaters get left alone to do what they please.

Blizzard on the other hand will never see another dime from me after banning single player trainer users from Starcraft 2: WoL. This is not the Blizzard I grew up with. The Blizzard that allowed you to install as many copies of the multiplayer portion of games like Warcraft and Starcraft for free, as you like. This is some evil doppelganger just pretending to be the real deal.

Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it.--Abraham Lincoln

I agree as many others do as well. Blizzard used to be more gamer friendly and they were one of my favorites. We've seen it elsewhere, since trainers don't directly add to the bottom line, pffft, down with trainers and trainer users. No longer a Blizzard supporter.